Demecia King v. Town Of Clarks And Mayor Chad Coates And Board Of Alderman, Chrissy Jolly, Shawn Guinn, Jason Morris, Margie Fisher, Patsy Fisher In Their Official Capacity And Xyz Insurance Company

Supreme Court of Louisiana
February 22, 2022
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
DEMECIA KING
VS.
TOWN OF CLARKS AND MAYOR CHAD
COATES AND BOARD OF ALDERMAN,
CHRISSY JOLLY, SHAWN GUINN, JASON
MORRIS, MARGIE FISHER, PATSY FISHER IN
THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY AND XYZ
INSURANCE COMPANY
No. 2021-C-01897
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Demecia King - Applicant Plaintiff; Applying For Writ Of Certiorari, Parish
of Caldwell, 37th Judicial District Court Number(s) 28,642, Court of Appeal,
Second Circuit, Number(s) 53,987-CW;
_ _ _ _ _ _
February 22, 2022
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
JDH
JLW
SJC
JTG
WJC
JBM
PDG
02/22/2022 "See News Release 009 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2021-C-01897
DEMECIA KING
vs.
TOWN OF CLARKS AND MAYOR CHAD COATES AND BOARD OF
ALDERMAN, CHRISSY JOLLY, SHAWN GUINN, JASON MORRIS,
MARGIE FISHER, PATSY FISHER IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY
AND XYZ INSURANCE COMP ANY
On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit,
Parish of Caldwell
PER CURIAM
In a petition filed in August of 2016, the applicant, Demecia King, alleges
that, in November of 2015, and again in March of 2016, her home was damaged
when it was flooded by water from a nearby manhole. Thus, the petition was not
prescribed on its face. Respondents filed a motion for summary judgment raising
the defense of prescription. Specifically, respondents alleged that King's petition
was filed almost four years after she became aware of earlier flooding, and that her
claims were therefore prescribed. In support of their motion, respondents attached
King's deposition, wherein she acknowledged that she had experienced other, prior
flooding events, and testified that the flooding was the same each time there was a
significant rainfall.
A motion for summary judgment is a procedural device used when there is no
genuine issue of material fact for all or part of the relief prayed for by a litigant.
LSA-C.C.P. art. 966(B)(2). As such, a motion for summary judgment should only
be granted if the motion, memorandum, and supporting documents show that there
is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the mover is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law. LSA-C.C.P. art. 966(A)(3). A genuine issue is one about which
reasonable persons could disagree. Hines v. Garrett, 04-0806 (La. 6/25/04), 876
1
02/22/22